Ferrari Power Unit Hardware & Software

[LM10]

Why did Ferrari vote in favor of the 2021 rules knowing a lot of the fuel system has been standardized, potentially minimizing their chances to play with it?

Also Mark Hughes article on the matter
https://www.motorsportmagazine.com/opin ... ally-going

I’m betting they’re going to be dynamite through sector three at Interlagos.

Mark said it very well and if they indeed will still be explosive in s3 the fuel flow saga will put to an end.
and hide and seek saga will continue

That’s why I hope that they just go conservative with their PU. Just to troll. If they know they’re in legal territory, they don’t need to prove anything.

[MtthsMlw]

this just came out of nowhere
Ferrari: in Brazil Leclerc brings the 2020 engine to debut
https://it.motorsport.com/f1/news/f1-fe ... 0/4594696/

Makes sense but it's just a rumor.

[loner]

this just came out of nowhere
Ferrari: in Brazil Leclerc brings the 2020 engine to debut
https://it.motorsport.com/f1/news/f1-fe ... 0/4594696/

Makes sense but it's just a rumor.

til it happens,we shall know before Friday.

[hollus]

A few posts that were about FIA or other teams have been removed. Same applies to some team-talk posts below (not any longer) about championship position, PR, image...
Once more, try to keep it on the engine and its surroundings. And thanks to most for actually doing so, by the way.

[ncx]

In the 2021 regulations there is a schematic of the fuel system, §6.6.1.

The sequence is lift pump > collector pot > primer pump > fuel flow sensor. It is the primer pump that would generate any pulses.

So pressure in the collector is not the issue, constant or otherwise.

I cannot comment on what is going to be used in 2021 as I am not privy to the information you posted. These on here conversations/discussions are about the system that is being used at present, A system that have been used from at least the NA 2.4L V8 era, where the 'collector-pot (looks like a soda bottle upside down) is pressurized with fuel (low pressure) by the lift pumps, this low pressure fuel passes through the fuel sensor/meter on its way to the mechanical high pressure pump intake normally driven by an inlet camshaft. this system have no 'primer pump' between collector-pot and fuel flow sensor/meter so there is no pulses through the fuel flow sensor/meter. It is interesting to know that according to you in 2021 by the addition of a 'primer pump' into the system,in between the collector-pot and the fuel flow sensor/meter there is going to be generated pulses through the fuel flow sensor/meter.

The 2021 regs are here https://www.fia.com/file/105636/download/29731.

At a cursory look the PU specs have changed little, but one of the additions is the fuel system schematic. This diagram is necessary because it identifies pipework which is also now prescribed in the 2021 regulations.

My supposition is that this simply brings into the regs controls that are currently identified in TDs.

Can I ask why you think the system is currently as you describe?

I searched on the web for a diagram or at least some useful specifics of the current fuel system in F1, but haven't found anything so far. The only piece of information that might be worth mentioning is the recent FIA invitation to tender for standard fuel system for 2021. The vague impression I got from the wording of it is that the intention was to standardize the system that is currently used, and therefore the diagram in the TRs of 2021 could be representative of the current system too.

The official text of the invitation is no longer available on the FIA legal webpages. Here follows an extract of it (I think I took it from motorsport.com, but it is also on several other sites).

“The aim of single source supply is to retain current levels of Formula One fuel system performance for all cars at a reduced cost for the competitors whilst also removing the requirement for competitors to design or source their own fuel system components.”
“The components can be carried over between seasons, which removes the need for costly continuous performance development”.
“Fuel flow limitation enforcement is key to the fairness of the competition, and common fuel system components shall contribute to a fair regulation of the competition by the FIA.”

[saviour stivala]

The formula one ‘return-less’ fuel flow system (fuel transfer from fuel tank to engine combustion chambers) as in use at the present 2019 season.
Electrically driven low pressure lift pumps >> pressurized collector pot >> fuel flow sensor/meter >> high pressure mechanical engine driven pump >> fuel rail >> injectors.

[henry]

The formula one ‘return-less’ fuel flow system (fuel transfer from fuel tank to engine combustion chambers) as in use at the present 2019 season.
Electrically driven low pressure lift pumps >> pressurized collector pot >> fuel flow sensor/meter >> high pressure mechanical engine driven pump >> fuel rail >> injectors.

Have you been able to find a source for this assertion? Why do you think the FIA have decided to enforce a different system for 2021?

[saviour stivala]

The differences in the fuel systems (fuel flow from fuel tank to combustion chambers) between the system used in the NA-2.4-liter V8 era and the present turbocharged hybrid, apart from the hybrid’s max fuel flow and max fuel load restrictions + the higher injection pressure + being a direct injection system are:-
NA 2.4-litre V8:- electrically driven lift pumps > pressurized collector pot > high pressure mechanical pump driven normally by engine water pump, with pump inside fuel tank > fuel rail > injectors shower type outside and on top of air trumpets). System with return fuel to tank.
Present turbocharged hybrid:- electrically driven lift pumps > pressurized collector pot > fuel flow sensor/meter > high pressure mechanical pump mounted on engine and driven normally by inlet camshaft > fuel rail > injectors side mounted (exhaust side) (direct injection). System return-less.

[PlatinumZealot]

Is quite normal for positive displacement pump tobhave a built in relief/return valve. Thats the only way i can see the fuel not churning around in there till it boils.

[henry]

Is quite normal for positive displacement pump tobhave a built in relief/return valve. Thats the only way i can see the fuel not churning around in there till it boils.

The 2021 diagram shows several.

[saviour stivala]

The formula one ‘return-less’ fuel flow system (fuel transfer from fuel tank to engine combustion chambers) as in use at the present 2019 season.
Electrically driven low pressure lift pumps >> pressurized collector pot >> fuel flow sensor/meter >> high pressure mechanical engine driven pump >> fuel rail >> injectors.

Have you been able to find a source for this assertion? Why do you think the FIA have decided to enforce a different system for 2021?

My ‘assertion’ (your chose of word) re-the fuel flow system in use up to the present time as posted is yes ‘confident’ and a ’fact of believe’. But was not meant to be ‘forceful’. It was simply in response to an ‘assertion’ that a pump in the system before the fuel flow sensor/meter can be made to produce pulses to effect flow meter reading. I will take an ex-Williams F1 engineer technical insights writings of F1 technology in use any time as against an ‘assertion’ that “because the FIA happened to print their 2021 mandated fuel system” which is different to what is used today, the present system must be the same.

[stevesingo]

@NCX. There is no fuel pulses in the fuel passing through the fuel flow meter by the low pressure electrically driven fuel lift pumps as the fuel that passes through the fuel flow meter is fuel at a constant low pressured in the fuel pot. Pot capacity approx 2.5kg/3.0-3.5l.
The following might not concern you, but it might concern others. All fuel that passes through the fuel flow meter must end-up being combusted, which means that regardless of fuel system diagrams shown the F1 system have no excess fuel return to fuel tank (return-less fuel system). The fuel flow meter only measures fuel flow passing through it, it does not control the flow mass passing through it. The flow mass control is controlled by the fuel injection system. Regardless of “it is not true” what goes through the injectors (flow mass) regardless of the mille or Nano seconds and number of injections, including fuel pressure and temperature is logged in data logger.
The ability/capability of the FIA/race control to police the fuel flow as well as the race fuel weight used with the means and tools at their disposal is as near foolproof as could be.
There have been 4 fuel rules infringements that I know of since the start of the new power unit formula. 3 of these fuel flow infringements happened only once on just ‘one part’ of a lap of the whole race, yet they did not escape the FIA/race control monitoring of the fuel rules.
2014 RBR notified several times during the race that they were exceeding the fuel flow limits. RBR argued that according to their data logger their fuel flow through their injectors were within the rules and that they preferred to go by their data logger instead of the fuel flow meter reading. They ended disqualified.
2018 Force India disqualified from eight place in US GP, car was found to have breached fuel flow limit during one part of the opening lap.
2018 Haas disqualified from US GP, car was found to have used more fuel than that allowed (fuel load). The rule breach happened ‘only on the last lap’.
2019 RBR car exceed fuel flow limit in Baku qualifying 1 (over one lap) car was disqualified from qualifying.

Whilst I fully agree with what you are saying, what is to stop a team from inputting incorrect injector flow data (g/ms) in to the ECU? The Data may show compliance with the limit, but only based an a false constant.

"The possibility of inputting incorrect injector flow data (g/ms) in to the ECU?". "Software:-the programs and other operating information used by a computer". In use by formula one teams 'all software' have to be approved by the FIA.

Sure, all software is approved by the FiA. What I am referring to is injector calibration data. For the ECU software to correctly meter that right amount of fuel, it needs to know the flow rate of the injector. Say we have an injector which flows 1000g/sec but we tell the ECU it flows 950g/sec. The calculated flow mass will be different to the actual flow mass. The data logs will show data based on 950g/sec. If the fuel flow sensor is also interfered with to the tune of 5%, then the will be correlation between the two.

[Tommy Cookers]

afaik imo and fwiw ....

what calibration of fuel injectors ?
this is not traditional cosy injection as in NA V8s (where injection is a steady flow into port air at 1 bar)

here we have DI ....
multiple timed high-rate injections against gas pressure going from 4 bar to maybe 150 bar by tdc ( and more after tdc)
there is no mandated calibration for this
and nothing that is a standard applicable to all engines at all times
each engine type will have its own in-use relationship between injector signals and fuelling outcomes
ok the injectors control the mass flow but they don't measure the mass flow

nothing can consistently be used to contravene indicated-legal fuel rates from mandated officially-calibrated fuel rate meters
yes it would be interesting to know what fuelling violations were determined in the 2 or 3 cases of contravention


and btw ....
(A) the fuel rate rules require engines to run eg all steady rpm from 10500 to 12100 on no more than 100kg/hr
but the designer might prefer to have constant ideal AFR accelerating through this rpm range
this requires iirc about 1.5 gm of fuel held back for 1 sec so that the average fuel rate accelerating is 100 kg/hr
isn't this possible without breaking fuel line rules ?
and isn't this FIA-accepted/manufacturer-intended ? - (just don't call it fuel accumulation !)

(B) in the 10500 rpm thread it was shown that they now run 10300 to 11900 rpm
the displayed sampled rpm value over-reads the true on-upshift rpm so aren't they really running 10150 to 11750 rpm ?
much reducing the fuel hold-back needed for constant AFR acceleration and helping in 'steady' running at constant AFR

isn't (B) the result of the historic scrutiny and pressure over (A) ?

[godlameroso]

The formula one ‘return-less’ fuel flow system (fuel transfer from fuel tank to engine combustion chambers) as in use at the present 2019 season.
Electrically driven low pressure lift pumps >> pressurized collector pot >> fuel flow sensor/meter >> high pressure mechanical engine driven pump >> fuel rail >> injectors.

Have you been able to find a source for this assertion? Why do you think the FIA have decided to enforce a different system for 2021?

This is how all high pressure fuel systems work. This being a direct injection fuel system requires a secondary mechanical pump to raise line pressure. The electric pickup pump is rated between 30-40psi, to get to 500psi requires the fuel be re-pressurized. This requires an accumulator as backflow would damage the electric pump.

The measurement point is in the "low pressure side" simply because it is closer to the fuel flow point of origin. It's not practical to place it upstream because of the accumulator required to raise line pressure.

[Tommy Cookers]

This being a direct injection fuel system requires a secondary mechanical pump to raise line pressure. The electric pickup pump is rated between 30-40psi, to get to 500psi requires the fuel be re-pressurized.

in F1 (the limit is) 500 bar not 500 psi ?